Siedel v. Muehlenbrink
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the CourtKelly, P. J.
The County Court had complete jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject-matter of the action up to that stage in the trial where the plaintiff’s attorney, while on the witness stand as a witness for the plaintiff, testified to his computation of interest upon the plaintiff’s demand and asked that the complaint be amended so as to include the entire amount due. According to the counsel, the amount was $2,144.69. The learned county judge expressed some doubt as to his power to grant the amendment *70aslced, but the defendant’s counsel making no objection, on the contrary stating, “ He is…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Van Clief v. . Van VechtenNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- National Surety Co. v. RosenbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
- Tappin v. MacLean, New York County Courts1922
3Cited by1 opinion
- Thomasian v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953